Metaphors work poorly for design questions. Asking about aliens when you are really asking about the size of Unicode, or asking about unicorns and horses when you are really asking about a property on the base type that some elements of the collection may have and others not... these nice stories confuse the core question.
What's more, when people try to write too much in the metaphor, they obscure the actual question they are really trying to find out more about and start getting people speculating about alien languages (could be a fun world building question - has nothing to do with programming) or the nature of a unicorn (is it a horse? is the base type MyLittlePony?).
And so, we get poor answers to questions because the real question is hidden in metaphor.
We get poor questions because as the question isn't tacked down with any rigidity, it morphs adding little bits of the story to disqualify certain answers.
And we get crap that isn't searchable and isn't useful to other people. No one is going to think to search for aliens on Programmers.SE if they are interested on the size of the Unicode space. No one is going to search for unicorns when trying to deal with polymorphic objects in a functional manner.
And even assuming that someone does find these questions, the question and answers are too wrapped up in metaphor for them to be able to generalize the solution or apply it to their problem and will have to ask it again (hopefully this time with programming terms). And even if question is essentially a duplicate of the other question no one should reasonably cast a duplicate vote for "What is the size of the largest unallocated unicode block?" to "Can unicode support an alien language with millions of glyphs?"
The clickbait titles are a knowledge black hole. Some have dismayed that knowledge is locked up in chat because it is hard to search for. However, I contend that it is easier to find knowledge in chat and reference it again than it is to find a useful pattern or other information that can be applied to an answer in another question.
The clickbait questions themselves are very draining on community moderation and curating of the material. On a site with as little community moderation and curation as we experience here, having a new user post another (poor) answer to the question... from my personal preference I would probably down vote, shake my head and walk away. I don't want to have anything to do with those questions or their answers - they have already taken up too much of my time as I write this. I do not have the energy to explain to another user why this is not a good question and why other poor answers have gotten up votes that they are expecting too. Unfortunately, as I write this, it is rare for other people to try themselves, and even rarer for the advocates of having the question be there and open to help in explaining how to write a good answer to the question to other users.
Thus, in my opinion, clickbait questions should be closed promptly until the user can format the question in such a way that it doesn't depend on metaphor and allegory to ask a sensible programming question.